U.S. v. BRUNZO, 8:14CR257. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20141027863
Visitors: 18
Filed: Oct. 23, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 23, 2014
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on the motion to continue by defendant James M. Brunzo, Jr. (Brunzo) (Filing No. 27). Brunzo seeks a continuance of the trial scheduled for November 3, 2014. Brunzo has submitted an affidavit in accordance with paragraph 9 of the progression order whereby Brunzo consents to the motion and acknowledges he understands the additional time may be excludable time for the purposes of the Speedy Trial Act (Filing No. 28). Brun
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on the motion to continue by defendant James M. Brunzo, Jr. (Brunzo) (Filing No. 27). Brunzo seeks a continuance of the trial scheduled for November 3, 2014. Brunzo has submitted an affidavit in accordance with paragraph 9 of the progression order whereby Brunzo consents to the motion and acknowledges he understands the additional time may be excludable time for the purposes of the Speedy Trial Act (Filing No. 28). Brunz..
More
ORDER
THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the motion to continue by defendant James M. Brunzo, Jr. (Brunzo) (Filing No. 27). Brunzo seeks a continuance of the trial scheduled for November 3, 2014. Brunzo has submitted an affidavit in accordance with paragraph 9 of the progression order whereby Brunzo consents to the motion and acknowledges he understands the additional time may be excludable time for the purposes of the Speedy Trial Act (Filing No. 28). Brunzo's counsel represents that government's counsel has no objection to the motion. Upon consideration, the motion will be granted.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Brunzo's motion to continue trial (Filing No. 27) is granted.
2. Trial of this matter is re-scheduled for December 8, 2014, before Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon and a jury. The ends of justice have been served by granting such motion and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. The additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motion, i.e., the time between October 23, 2014, and December 8, 2014, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act for the reason that defendant's counsel requires additional time to adequately prepare the case. The failure to grant additional time might result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B).
Source: Leagle
